Most so-called athiests are like the man who is morally opposed to breakfast, but who, just to drive his point home, insists on urinating in your oatmeal.
As Garrison Keillor (in his younger, less bitter days) once said: "He was the kind of a man that struck you wouldn't learn another thing until the day he died, but who, about fifften minutes after that, was in for quite an education."
STURP found the image was not just a negative image, but a 3-D negative image. This method would not meet that criteria.
Yes, I'm sure they had 'panes of glass,' especially large ones, during that period...
``Most likely it involved some real wicked people,'' Wilson said.
I'm sorry, but this guy is the same kind of filth that passed along "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as being true.
"You know, those Christians bake those 'hot cross buns' on Easter using the BLOOD OF PAGAN BABIES!!!!!!!!!!"
Newbies....
These alternate views are all nonsense. The shroud sat around for centuries before the concept of a negative image was ever understood.
Just another yawn. Folks think that they know everything when it is apparent they do not
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Nikas777. Different from these, so the ping is here. :') To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Then again, for some reason, many people do care, to include atheists, wiccans, pagans, muslims, etc.. I wonder why?
5.56mm
The question is not whether modern investigators can figure out some way to produce a reasonable copy of the Shroud but, given the quality of forged Medieval artifacts in general, why they would have produced a forgery so good that modern researchers still puzzle over it and that’s so difficult to see without modern photographic equipment. We’re talking about people who painted Biblical scenes with all sorts of ahistorical details and were fairly careless with other forged artifacts (for example, the spear that supposedly ws the Spear of Longinus in Vienna dates to the 7th Century) producing a hard to see image in normal light that accurately reflects not only a real crucifixion but also contains details that conflict with what was commonly depicted during that period and accurate details of a Jewish burial.
My conclusion is that if the Shroud of Turin turns out to be a fake (and I don’t believe it is), that it’s either a copy of an authentic original or, far more unlikly in my opinion, it was produced by a Medieval artist with researched Judaism extensively and crucified (murdered) a person (or more than one person) to get the details correct.